Forum:Suggestions
There are currently about 150 items in the Wanted list. This varies as articles are written or titles are redirected. An important piece of information to check when creating a new page is the number of links to the page, which is listed next to the item on the Wanted list. Most often links are directed to the singular form of an item and once that page is created, the plural form is redirected to the page written for the singular form. This is in part by design, it is a simple matter to create a link to the singular form and add an 's' outside the link to appear to be a link to the plural form as needed. There are exceptions to this guideline, such as the race pages, but it is probably a good idea to check the number of links when putting a title on a new page (or choosing the link to use). This is not a major issue, it's effect is only measured by the number of redirects. The point is that if there is only a few links to the plural form and a hundred links to the singular form, or vice versa, the one with the most links should be used as the title of the page and the other be redirected. Again, not a major issue...just a guideline. Also, on the page itself, any link that is the same as the title will appear as bold. Any link in the other form will continue to appear as a link, even though it is simply a redirect. In this case I have been trying to replace the link with bold to avoid having a link that simply redirects to the same page. Hopefully this makes sense, but there is a reason I didn't become a teacher (so please ask if you need more info). :p MysticX2 (talk) 11:11, May 23, 2013 (UTC) I've realized that sometimes you might have suggestions regarding certain pages but you don't really want to write a section or edit something that is already there. This could be anything related to any MOM page or suggestion for a page that doesn't exist yet. Some things that are suggested may take some time while other things that are suggested may be able to be done immediately. Please check back because there may be questions for clarity. Thanks for visiting this Wiki. MysticX2 (talk) 11:05, April 14, 2013 (UTC) Archive Links Archive Races page I've been looking at the individual race pages, Barbarians, Gnolls, etc., and I'm thinking that the Society section would make a good article on the Races page. The Races currently has the copy of the normal units from the main page which is what I think those Society sections should replace. The other information can be updated and I am leaning toward using the Unrest chart from the Fortress page instead of the one that is currently on the Races page, mainly because of potential copyright issue and because I'm not sure if those '1's are as accurate as the percentages. I'm moving the section from below to here for that reason too. Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 21:20, July 3, 2013 (UTC) :I'm not sure I understand. By "Society" for the generic page what do you have in mind? Certainly not copy-and-pasting 14 sections from the individual race pages. Also I think doing some verifications on the racial tensions will remove whatever copyright issues. Spearman D92-R (talk) 00:47, July 4, 2013 (UTC) ::That is exactly what I was looking at doing (and I have copied them). After reading all 14 of them I think they will fit nicely on the Races page to replace that copy of the normal units from the main page. I think that section gives an interesting insight into each race and will give people something to think about when choosing a race. The rest of the page will take care of the additional basic information that should be on the page. It will certainly be an improvement on what is there! ::The idea is that those sections give an overview of each race and will work as a portal to the individual race pages. The page should be, after all, a summary page with insights into the races. :D MysticX2 (talk) 01:41, July 4, 2013 (UTC) ::As for the unrest chart, I think percentages are going to better indicate the tension caused, but as you say even that will need to have some verifications (percentages versus count). MysticX2 (talk) 01:25, July 4, 2013 (UTC) ::: Alright, I have a couple remarks then. First I'm glad you think the blurbs are worth copying! That said, I think that it is too much text for one page, and it is not to-the-point. Descriptions should give flavor to the page, not dominate it. Let me whip up some shorter remarks for the Races page itself (maybe focusing mostly on relations and context) and see what you think of that instead?? ::: Also, I am not committed to what I wrote as being final. I might make serious revisions, to make them a bit more matter-of-fact, e.g., more in line with the Barbarians description. Headrock could even suddenly come back and change them. ::: If you or anyone has criticism, different ideas, or revisions, that would be great. Furthermore the race pages need structuring. I'd like to think over a final format for the pages to follow, so we can get in more of the information that needs to be where it needs to be, rather than haphazardly sprinkling it around various sections. ::: Spearman D92-R (talk) 05:21, July 4, 2013 (UTC) Unrest I've been using Headrock's chart from the Fortress page for the unrest tables, but we have another chart that is different on the Races page (which needs a lot of rewriting). The thing about the one on the Races page is that it is copyrighted and there is no indication from the person that posted it of permission to use the chart. There are some differences, and the one Headrock posted has the statement that changes might be needed. Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 11:51, May 12, 2013 (UTC) I seem to have lost my connection for a few minutes! The statement on his page is that it is "possibly copyrighted by someone named..." For now I'll leave it for that reason, but I'll check into it further. MysticX2 (talk) 12:18, May 12, 2013 (UTC) As there were some questions recently (especially ones regarding Great Wasting and Armageddon), I think the lack of data on additional unrest modifiers should be mentioned here. Perhaps some kind of full unrest chart mentioning all the modifiers? Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 09:47, June 13, 2013 (UTC) Normal Units I'm a few days from posting for the Normal Unit page, please wait until you see what is included to make suggestions. :D MysticX2 (talk) 09:57, June 22, 2013 (UTC) I've reached the point where I really need to see how this looks. After previewing what I have, it is so large I am going to go ahead and post it to the Normal Unit page even though it is not complete. Please make suggestions here, make corrections or re-writes on the page itself unless it is something that needs to be discussed. Remember this page is only as it relates to Normal Units. MysticX2 (talk) 13:31, June 24, 2013 (UTC) * Need to incorporate Upkeep Costs. * Note that Upkeep Costs are 1/50th of normal production costs * Used Archetype link instead of icon for non-Racial units to avoid having 14 images in the Swordsmen part of the Town buildings. MysticX2 (talk) 14:31, June 24, 2013 (UTC) The manual shows that the Alchemists Guild increases To Hit by 10%, and that is noted for the Alchemy retort, but does the building improve To Hit? In the Normal Units column of the Town Buildings section, would it be better to replace the icons for the universal units with just a link to that unit or leave it as it is? MysticX2 (talk) 20:28, June 24, 2013 (UTC) I added the Archetype chart, but it can be replaced based on recommendations and then I'll use it on the Normal Unit Archetype page. Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 21:03, June 24, 2013 (UTC) Well, I've done about all the damage I can do to the Normal Unit page for now. I tried to be concise without being too sterile and I ended up using more tables than I intended, but I think they made the page more readable and maybe even more interesting. I know there is plenty of room for improvement and corrections, and I'm still open to suggestions so what do you think? MysticX2 (talk) 07:50, June 29, 2013 (UTC) :In some cases, less text and more pictures/tables/charts look better. And this is that kind of case for sure, keep it up. Not in the strategy sections however. Regarding strategies, I think we should discuss these here. Everyone could list their strategy suggestions (should involve normal units, even a normal+fantastic unit combo will do). Few examples I can think of are berserk first strike+AP, death trolls, chaos boosting (Chaos Surge on chaos channeled units, really kicks in on Slingers and other 6-8 figure units), etc. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) ::Thanks, I had thought of a couple of those, but I'd also like to avoid making strategies the largest part of the page. I only have two so far, but they don't have to remain...well I guess the FIW should definitely stay, but could be improved. Berserk seems to be a very good choice. What do you mean "death trolls", I had thought about rushed War Trolls? Maybe I should have made the section High figure units instead of Lionheart and included Chaos, etc, and mention several options for that. Nothing is certain yet, I'm still looking for suggestions. MysticX2 (talk) 09:25, July 1, 2013 (UTC) :::Death trolls is exactly what it is: death trolls. Trolls with kitty magic. Undeath really saves up their upkeeps and improves their stats while giving some immunities. Regeneration makes up for most of downsides. Berserk is also very good for War Trolls, as Regeneration simply revives them if you win. Consider finding Armsmaster hero though, if you wish to blitzkrieg. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 13:42, July 1, 2013 (UTC) I had left out Chaos Channel and Undead because they made Normal Units into something else, but now I'm thinking that I should have included another section: Altered Units or something along that line to mention those alternatives. The way you explained death trolls is what I thought you meant by death trolls by the way, but I wanted to be sure. Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 00:15, July 2, 2013 (UTC) Perhaps I should restate that last question for clarity. Would it be better to have a separate section Altered Units to discuss Chaos Channels and Undead, or should it just be part of the already existing Strategy section? MysticX2 (talk) 00:55, July 3, 2013 (UTC) :I think it should go to Strategy section, since Undead and Chaos Channels are basically, special unit enchantments, and all their alterations are listed on their specific pages. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 07:48, July 3, 2013 (UTC) Introduction Page I think I have figured out a rough outline of some things to include on an introduction page which will also take care of a few of the links I had no idea of what to do with them. The page might be better entitled information page, but basically it would include information about Microprose, Simtex, Releases, and Patches. Originally I was thinking of having a separate page for Releases and Patches, but I was also thinking that the information would include changes from previous releases or patches. Now I'm leaning more toward something along the lines of, "continuing projects" with a link to the site with the best information about those projects/patches and only stating that they exist and for the most current information follow the link. This will allow for the page to be written and offer access to the newest information without having to write a new section every time a patch is changed. Thoughts or suggestions, volunteers to work on such a page? MysticX2 (talk) 13:53, June 3, 2013 (UTC) :Well, there are plenty of "patches", remakes of MoM and it's spiritual successors, we could mention all of them, but their quality differs greatly. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 16:28, June 3, 2013 (UTC) ::I'd like to avoid any works in progress patches or spiritual successors. I'm not too sure I like spiritual successors because those are often so subjective. For the moment I think there are enough completed patches, even when the work continues, and remakes. Ideally I'd like to make sure that new things work well and links aren't virus havens before including their links on a page. I know kyrub's work, and I'm fairly comfortable with including the link for v 1.40, but that is the only one I have any information about really. ::My concern is that including a link on a wiki page automatically lends credibility to another site and the patch, remake, etc. I don't have a problem with one being mentioned by a contributor in the Talk sections, but in the page itself should be thoroughly checked out. Also, I hate to follow a link only to find that you have to have an account on that site to access any information (for similar reasons). MysticX2 (talk) 11:22, June 5, 2013 (UTC) :::Agree. Should we start finding and posting links so we can check if they're worthy to mention? Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 01:56, June 6, 2013 (UTC) ::::Dozens, which is to say scores, and probably even hundreds, of core game concepts either need pages or need to have their existing content fleshed out. Consider how Normal Unit and Mana are each redlinked nearly 400 times. Though anything can be contributed of course... Spearman D92-R (talk) 02:44, June 6, 2013 (UTC) ::Yeah, I think we can start collecting links. It will take some time to confirm their play-ability...and to ensure that they are not "traps". I should also mention that I have not played any of kyrub's patches for MOM, I played his patch for Master of Orion and that is how I know about kyrub's work. MysticX2 (talk) 10:11, June 6, 2013 (UTC) :::Okay. For now, I can say that Implode's MP Edition is rather unworthy. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 14:58, June 6, 2013 (UTC) Morgana EvilLoynis pointed out that Morgana doesn't seem to ever have any spells. After checking a couple of other sites it seems that they do not list any spells for her either! This is different than the bug aspect, I believe, because it seems that there is a good chance that Morgana will not have any spells. Does anyone have information to the contrary? MysticX2 (talk) 09:04, May 26, 2013 (UTC) : My understanding is that there was nothing probabilistic about the bugged life/death magic hero spellbooks--all spells with internal index greater than 127 (all Death spells, and I think the last 33 Life spells) never appear unless you know them, even when the game designers intended otherwise. Mind Stormy (talk) 12:22, May 26, 2013 (UTC) ::So basically all Nature, Sorcery, or Chaos spells should be available to a hero that was intended to have those spells...it is just the Life realm and the Death realm spells that are affected. Thanks Mind Stormy! Ok, are the internal index numbers based alphabetically or by research cost (assuming first by rarity)? MysticX2 (talk) 08:37, May 28, 2013 (UTC) ::I have seen Morgana many times, but I never saw her having death spells. The only Life spell I've actively noticed on heroes is Healing. A quote from the 1.40 patch changelog: all human player's and the AI's heroes now can use their spell (Morgana, Ravashack, Torin...). ~ WikiContributor ::One thing you may not realize is that this Wiki is really not about Version 1.4+ aka Insecticide Patch mod. It's about the last official release which was V1.31. As of this patch I have never seen Morgana with the spells she had in previous versions unlike the few others who may or may not have them game to game. Crafting This section will be for discussing and suggestions for crafting, instead of using the talk for the create artifact and enchant item pages. MysticX2 (talk) 09:26, April 22, 2013 (UTC) Just noting some related pages that may be affected by crafting. Item Enchantments, Magical Item, Item Merchants, Item. I think the entire reason I found this wiki was because I was looking for a default list of magical items, so I have begun to create a sortable and numbered list of magical items with that in mind. Any suggestions that should be specifically mentioned on the magical item page will be appreciated. MysticX2 (talk) 10:31, May 23, 2013 (UTC) :I've changed my mind about the main content of the Magical Item page. Originally I thought that the item list would be the main content, now I'm thinking that the list will be a separate page. Since I'm very slow at writing content, this will take longer than I had hoped. MysticX2 (talk) 09:47, June 1, 2013 (UTC) ::I think Magical Item should only have very basic information and mostly links to different types of items. As for list, should be a page for Pre-defined Magical Items. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 15:08, June 1, 2013 (UTC) Spell Books The following is a suggestion from SpreadSheetNinja. I found that this information is already on the wiki! Page Spell Rarity contains this information. Is there somewhere else that this should be included? MysticX2 (talk) 08:40, May 6, 2013 (UTC) Hmm, looks like we will need to rework the spacing to keep it from overlapping. MysticX2 (talk) 09:07, April 25, 2013 (UTC) It seems that this type of information would be included in the spellbook page, but I haven't really focused on that recently. The first thing that comes to mind is that it relates mostly to starting a new game and also maybe retorts and wizards. I'll try to do an outline, but in the meantime...any other suggestions for the spellbook page? MysticX2 (talk) 10:31, April 28, 2013 (UTC) Realm Pages A sneak peek on not-coming-soon Realm pages. Would be nice to discuss the possible structures of these. Personally, I think that general realm specialization should be described, then some basic strategy given. Realm+Realm combinations should be included (as advanced strategies). List of Realm spells should be either merged with Realm page or copied into it in some way. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 10:34, May 7, 2013 (UTC) :While I don't have a clear picture of these pages at the moment, I'd love to see what your thoughts are. I don't know about merging or moving the list of spells...although that is likely going to be the end result. For one thing I think that the spells that appear on the main page are chosen from that list, which would mean that it would need to remain in any case, but the spells will probably also need to appear on the realm pages. Talking strategies could take so many directions, did you have an example in mind? Anyone else have ideas about these pages? MysticX2 (talk) 10:59, May 7, 2013 (UTC) ::Well, we can keep Spell List pages for the needs of main page, but redirect to Realm pages, where that list will be placed, if the pages are to be merged. About strategies: basic strategy is based on Realm's description, common things like "Life is good if you rely on normal units". Advanced strategy includes any special realm advices, 11 book strategies and combos with spells from other realms, as well as Realm+Retort combos. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 09:14, May 8, 2013 (UTC) :::Yeah, 11 book strategies are a good idea. I don't mean to suggest that any of the other things you mention here are bad or not a good idea, just that 11 book strategies are a definite. You almost have to have a list of the spells on the main realm page. Unlike Headrock, I can't pump out two complete pages or more a day (even if I spent all my time writing). Right now I'm trying to figure out the things that need to be done and in what order. I redirected some pages, like Orc to Orcs, and that has cut down on the list of pages needed. Some pages can be redirected once another page is written, but in the meantime they will stay on the list. Anyway, more good ideas...keep them coming! MysticX2 (talk) 09:28, May 8, 2013 (UTC) ::::Well, I think that you guys should finish with release candidate Race pages drafts, so we get to polishing them. Once polishing is done, we could get to Realms. Roads page will be created as well, by the way, as soon as Spearman will switch his attention off the Race pages. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 12:31, May 8, 2013 (UTC) :::::lol, Patience young one, we will get there. Remember most of this is done in "spare" time. I'd like to be done with it too, but every time I start one I find some little changes that have to be made. Keep the ideas coming and we might catch up with you before too long. :D MysticX2 (talk) 18:15, May 8, 2013 (UTC) Problems If you find anything that is not right on our wiki, post a note about it here, in that section. Personally, I did just found a plenty of old pages which include some wrong statements or just don't note important aspects of their subject. There can be more, so, if you feel like it, check any old page you come across. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 15:09, May 9, 2013 (UTC) :These are Non-Corporeal, where it is said that you should move NC unit out of stack before travelling via Enchanted Road (this advice is complete nonsence), Cracks Call, where it is said that this spell targets unit (while it targets a combat tile in fact), and it is not noted that Cracks Call destroys walls, Crusade, where a few things are not noted (see comments on Crusade page), Web, where it is not noted that dispelling the target allows it to fly again (you can even dispel it after web has been destroyed). By the way, we also don't have any note on Sailing movement type - only Swimming, which is used instead of Sailing (Swimming/Walking is used on Wiki when actual Swimming movement type is meant). Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 12:51, May 10, 2013 (UTC) ::It's never explicitly mentioned that Forester + Mountaineer = Pathfinding — any pages making mention of these abilities should be updated. Spearman D92-R (talk) 13:56, May 10, 2013 (UTC) :::Actually it is mentioned on the Forester page and on the Mountaineer page, I think I made that update after it was pointed out in a talk message. I don't know that it needs to be mentioned on either the Pathfinding page or the Path Finding page because that is discussing the ability and the enchantment...but there may be a section where it should be added. MysticX2 (talk) 00:46, May 11, 2013 (UTC) :::Ok, Pathfinding does have a group movement section, so it should probably be added there. MysticX2 (talk) 00:53, May 11, 2013 (UTC) It's really nice to see my advice has been taken into account, as many old pages are getting edits and discussions, but what about pages I mentioned? I don't think I can write it good enough. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 02:17, May 19, 2013 (UTC) : One thing to bear in mind is that the guy who founded and wrote most of the content on this wiki said he preferred existing pages to be as complete as possible before new ones were created. For my part, I'd like to try to follow his guidelines even in his absence so that if/when he does return (I'm guessing he will— people just need breaks), he doesn't get the impression that things have deteriorated. I know that MysticX has spent literally months just fine-tuning the existing pages prior to putting up the race page drafts, and I think he was mainly going ahead with them because a format was already submitted by Headrock with Barbarians and Gnolls. I'll definitely help you with roads because you're intent on it, but please don't get too impatient with us fuddy-duddies just yet. Spearman D92-R (talk) 15:11, May 19, 2013 (UTC) ::No, roads can wait, of course. I'm talking about mistakes, incorrect statements on NC, Cracks Call and/or Enchant Roads pages, and lack of important information on Crusade, Cracks Call and Web pages. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 16:12, May 19, 2013 (UTC) :::Yeah, I think that was mostly information that Twilight had shared with me in chat or that I indicated I would look into it...and I haven't made any significant edits since I finished posting the info I had for the race pages. I saw this earlier today, but didn't read it...so my fault, sorry. MysticX2 (talk) 00:58, May 20, 2013 (UTC) ::::Fixed most of things I mentioned, but NC page and Sailing type are still too much for me. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 14:35, May 23, 2013 (UTC) Finding pages While the wiki for the most part is well organized, there have been a few instances when finding a page could have been easier and could have prevented problems. For example, the first time I looked for an unrest table, I first thought there wasn't one and then I stumbled onto it on the fortress page. Another example, the chart suggestion above...I was surprised that it wasn't on the wiki only to stumble onto it a week later on the Spell Rarity page. Thoughts or suggestions? MysticX2 (talk) 11:51, May 12, 2013 (UTC) Information needs to be linked better in a ton of cases, and it has to be done intuitively by people actively searching for information. I think my first edit here was to submit a road construction chart to the engineers page, only to find that the information was located elsewhere, on the construction page. Now that I think on it, that was a HUGE shortcoming. The engineers page had 1 link to Construction, but there was no indication in the context of that link (which was just in the infobox) that it contained all the wiki's current information relevant to road building. Just for example. Spearman D92-R (talk) 22:38, May 12, 2013 (UTC) Redirects I'm putting this here because sometimes a logical link is not included on the wanted list. For example, Twilight noted that Engineer was not redirected to Engineers. I did not find Engineer in the wanted list because there were no "red" links to Engineer and therefore was not listed. Still, it is a logical link and should be redirected. Anyway, that is what this little section is for, links that should be redirected to a written page. At the moment, please only mention links to written pages that should be redirected to them (even if they are not on the wanted list). MysticX2 (talk) 11:41, May 31, 2013 (UTC) :Just noting Barrycaster's finding on Race not being redirected to Races, since our Race Pages discuss is archived. Twilight Sparkle the Alicorn Princess (talk) 03:48, June 9, 2013 (UTC)